DeepMemory: Model-based Memorization Analysis of Deep Neural Language Models
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The neural network model is having a significant impact on many real-world applications. Unfortunately, the increasing popularity and complexity of these models also amplifies their security and privacy challenges, with privacy leakage from training data being one of the most prominent issues. In this context, prior studies proposed to analyze the abstraction behavior of neural network models, e.g., RNN, to understand their robustness. However, the existing research rarely addresses privacy breaches caused by memorization in neural language models. To fill this gap, we propose a novel approach, DeepMemory, that analyzes memorization behavior for a neural language model. We first construct a memorization-analysis-oriented model, taking both training data and a neural language model as input. We then build a semantic first-order Markov model to bind the constructed memorization-analysis-oriented model to the training data to analyze memorization distribution. Finally, we apply our approach to address data leakage issues associated with memorization and to assist in dememorization. We evaluate our approach on one of the most popular neural language models, the LSTM-based language model, with three public datasets, namely, WikiText-103, WMT2017, and IWSLT2016. We find that sentences in the studied datasets with low perplexity are more likely to be memorized. Our approach achieves an average AUC of 0.73 in automatically identifying data leakage issues during assessment. We also show that with the assistance of DeepMemory, data breaches due to memorization of neural language models can be successfully mitigated by mutating training data without reducing the performance of neural language models.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it